W. J. KIELY & CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN B. DICKEY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A sign affixed to a building by the general contractor W. J. Kiely & Co. fell and injured pedestrian John Dickey. The contractor's motion for directed verdict was denied, and the jury found the contractor liable under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The appellate court affirmed the judgment.
The judgment against W. J. Kiely & Co. was affirmed. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur properly applied because the contractor had control of the instrument causing the injury (the sign), and the accident would not ordinarily occur absent negligence. The contractor's speculation that a subcontractor may have removed and replaced the sign was insufficient to relieve it of responsibility.
“this doctrine is not a substitute for proof but is a rule of evidence which raises an inference of negligence where the defendant has control of the instrument causing the injury and the accident is such that it would not occur in the ordinary nature of things absent negligence of the defendant”
Establishes the legal standard for applying res ipsa loquitur
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWhile Dickey stood on a sidewalk, a sign fell from the side of a building and struck him. W. J. Kiely & Co. was the general contractor performing repa…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Inference Of Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
John B. Dickey was injured by a sign which fell from the side of a building and struck him while he was standing on a sidewalk. W. J. Kiely & Co. was named a defendant because it was the general contractor performing certain repairs and alterations to the building; Fine Foods Operating Co. was named as a defendant because it was the tenant of the building; George Robb was also named as a defendant because he was the painting subcontractor. At the conclusion of a jury trial, the judge directed verdicts in favor of Fine Foods and Robb. Ruling upon W. J. Kiely & Co.’s motion for directed verdict was reserved and it was ultimately denied after the jury returned its verdict in favor of plaintiff, Dickey. Final judgment was entered upon the jury’s verdict for the plaintiff, Dickey, and against W. J. Kiely & Co. The instant appeal is from that judgment.
The judgments entered upon the directed verdicts in favor of Fine Foods and Robb have been separately appealed by Dickey, and have been affirmed upon a holding that the plaintiff did not establish a causal connection between any act or omission of these two defendants and his injury.
The jury verdict against the defendant W. J. Kiely & Co. rests upon the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. As has been often observed, this doctrine is not a substitute for proof but is a rule of evidence which raises an inference of negligence where the defendant has control of the instrument causing the injury and the accident is such that it would not occur in the ordinary nature of things absent negligence of the defendant. E. g., McKinney Supply Company v. Orovitz, Fla. 1957, 96 So.2d 209; Messina v. Baldi, Fla.App.1960, 120 So.2d 819. The trial judge properly instructed the jury upon this doctrine and the jury properly found that the inference was not rebutted.
The evidence clearly established that W. J. Kiely & Co. had control of the exterior of the building for the purpose of renovation. During the time that the company was exercising this control it affixed its company sign to the exterior wall of the *733building. It is also clear that the sign was improperly secured to the curved front of the building, and because of this defect, it fell upon the plaintiff. The possibility, urged by W. J. Kiely & Co., that its subcontractor may have removed the sign during the process of repainting and then replaced it, is not sufficient to relieve the contractor from its responsibility.
Affirmed.
HORTON, C. J., and CARROLL, CHAS., J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City CAB Co. OF Orlando, Inc. v. Green, 308 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…is trup because it was in nowise established that the application of brakes would not have occurred in the ordinary nature of things absent negligence of the driver. Orme v. Burr, 157 Fla. 378, 25 So. 2d 870 (1946); see W. J. Kiely & Co. v. Dickey, 124 So. 2d 731 (3d D.C.A.Fla.1960); Kopp v. Louisville Taxicab and Transfer, 257 S.W. 2d 891 (Ct.App.Ky.1953); Conley v. Town Taxi, 298 Mass. 130, 10 N.E. 2d 74 (1973); Bartlett v. Town Taxi, 263 Mass. 215, 160 N.E. 797 (1928); Klein v. Beeten, 169 Wis. 385,172 N.…
-
Dickey v. Fine Foods Operating Co., 124 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See W. J. Kiely & Co. v. Dickey, Fla.App.1960, 124 So. 2d 731. HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.…
-
Kadushin v. Philmac Realty Corp., 128 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)…rule of evidence whereby an inference arises which provides evidence that the injury sprang from defendant’s negligence. Yarbrough v. Ball U-Drive System, Fla.1950, 48 So. 2d 82. This court, in the case of W. J. Kiely & Co. v. Dickey, Fla.App.1960, 124 So. 2d 731, held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was properly applied in a case where a person was injured by a falling sign while standing on a sidewalk. The Supreme Court of Florida in Schott v. Pancoast Properties, Fla.1952, 57 So. 2d 431, held that…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- McKINNEY Supply Co. v. Orovitz, 96 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 1957)
- Messina v. Baldi, 120 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)